Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

180 degree turn back

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Europa-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

jonsmitheuropa(at)tiscali
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 12:11 pm Post subject: 180 degree turn back

Hi everyone!  It’s not often I’m moved to write here – I don’t have any technical skills to offer (I just very gratefully make use of other people’s knowledge by reading this forum!)



However, regarding this “180 degree turning back” issue I’m absolutely appalled at some of the comments I’m reading here.



I can’t say this loudly enough – or type it big enough:  !!!DO NOT TURN BACK!!!  It’s a killer.  It always has been and always will be.  There’s no big mystery about it – the SAFEST option will always be to land somewhere that’s reasonably in front of you.



That’s it said really; the rest of this message is just supporting material.  Sure, landing ahead may well result in damage to the plane.  But with a little skill and a little luck you should come away unscathed, and maybe the plane will too.  Depends on the local situation.  This is far far better than entering the roulette wheel of turning back, from which the consequences of losing…….well we know that don’t we?



Let’s look at Mr Average (me, you, all of us) in a worse case scenario.  Climbing out at 60 kts -  flaps still down (high drag) – nose well up cos it’s a nice powerful plane with the latest prop, when the unthinkable happens – at say 500 feet and totally unexpectedly the engine stops.  By the time we’ve reacted to it the speed will have dropped to 55 kts or probably less.  Then the penny drops and we smartly poke the stick forward and the nose thankfully starts to go down.  Speed will still be lost as the nose is going down until some sort of gliding attitude is attained; only then will the speed loss trend be halted.  If you’re a “switched on cookie” and you reacted well to the surprise the speed will now be steady at about 50 kts – but a lot less if you’re not so sharp – it might be 40 kts or less.  Remember, nose high and power off – rate of speed loss will be tremendous.  What speed should we be aiming for in the subsequent glide?  I don’t know – 60 kts seems a reasonable

  safe approach and landing speed.   More if you need to manoeuvre significantly.  To increase speed in order to obtain a safe gliding speed with the engine off,  (and especially if the flaps are down)  will need a much lower nose attitude – lower than we would EVER use in normal circumstances and will use up a very great deal of height – probably most of your original 500 feet.  Just to get the plane flying safely again.  Still going to turn back??  I promise you – you will not make it!!



The first golden rule is to get the bl**dy nose well down, keep it well down and monitor the speed carefully before any sort of manoeuvring is attempted.  In the worse type of critical situation you can still achieve a lot with the plane under good control.  If you lose control by not achieving and maintaining a safe speed everything will be lost.



Incidently, this entire posting is not aimed at the Europa.  It’s relevant to every aeroplane there is.  We’re fortunate with the Europa in that we are slightly better off than many other planes because it’s such a great design with super easy handling and does have some degree of glide performance which might help reach a landing/ controlled crash site that many other planes wouldn’t have the legs to reach.  All aeroplanes glide like bricks, the Europa is just a slightly more streamlined brick.  The Europa will stall and spin if badly handled, say in an unwise and badly managed turn back.   It’s only an aeroplane after all and all aeroplanes will stall and spin, at least every one I’ve ever flown.



Just a few comments on postings I’ve read recently:  First the most serious:

Someone wrote that during their conversion training they were advised and demonstrated (BY A PFA COACH for goodness sake!!) that a turn back is possible in the Europa from 300 feet.  If people are being taught things like this then it is of no surprise at all to me that these sorts of accidents are still happening – as they have been for nearly 100 years.  I don’t know the person who advocates this practise and I don’t really want to, but I feel this sort of advice has no place in modern day coaching.  The person who wrote this post went on to say he intends to practise the manoeuvre again.  PLEASE DON’T.  It sounds most dangerous.  Firstly, heaven forbid, you might be tempted to attempt it for real, secondly just doing it under controlled simulated conditions sounds fraught with danger.  It would be a real shame to become a statistic trying to practise this dangerous exercise.  JUST LAND AHEAD!



A real engine failure after take off will be totally unexpected and will place even the most experienced pilot ever in a totally alien environment with a huge workload.  There will be a fraction of the normal human resources available to control the plane – that’s why any action taken must be kept as simple as possible.  Incidently, pilot experience does not necessarily seem to be a factor.  In fact a newly qualified PPL maybe "safer" because hopefully he will rely on his recent training and put the thing down straight ahead.  An "old hand" may be more likely to "think" he is able to turn back where in reality - he can't.



I’ve read discussion about how individual aircraft of the same design (ie the Europa) have different stall/ spin characteristics from others of the same mark.  Maybe, in fact quite probably, but irrelevant to this “turn back” discussion.  Throughout any manoeuvring near the ground, whether during an unwise turn back or whatever you should be nowhere near stalling!!  That’s just basic skill and handling.  If the difference between one variant or another determines the possible successful outcome or otherwise of a situation – DON’T GO THERE!!  Fly the aircraft properly; well balanced and at a safe speed and you will stay safe.  People talk about slipping or skidding turns near the stall.  DO NOT DO THIS NEAR THE GROUND.  If you cannot manoeuvre near the ground without slipping or skidding and/or stalling then don’t do it – you’ve guessed it …. Land ahead!!



I’ve read about Europa fuel tanks and their survivability.  I don’t know any of the technical bits but it seems to me to be an excellent, strong and well - positioned design. I’ve flown a Piper Pawnee with the fuel tank sandwiched between the engine and the pilot, just ready for the engine to be pushed back into the tank.  The Super Cub has the left wing tank header tank just above your toes.  I’ve flown the Falke motorglider with the tank just behind your head!  It’s got to go somewhere and the Europa seems to be at least as good as any of those!  If an aircraft is to sadly stall/ spin into the ground then I don’t think any type of fuel tank will survive this.  Don’t worry about the tank – concentrate on flying safely instead and you’ll be fine!



The Europa is a fine aircraft but it will bite back if mis-handled– just like any other aircraft will.  We must all strive to be safe and sensible and try not to let a plane bite us.



Best wishes, sorry to ramble on – got carried away!

Jon Smith

G-TERN

Visit -  www.EuropaOwners.org

aireupora(at)sbcglobal.ne
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:06 pm Post subject: 180 degree turn back

I’m going to piggy-back on Jon's comments.  I have over 12K+ hours and over half of those were as an instructor in both airplanes and helicopters.  I taught all my primary students the 180 turn back to the runway, but not the 180 that most of you are thinking of. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

  the first turn has to be into the wind.  It has to be a turn of about 45 degrees then back to opposite way to get line-up with the runway. 

  I good friend was teaching at the Livermore airport a couple of years ago and almost made it back after the engine failed on takeoff in  a KCAB.  He hit between the runways.  Both he and his student walked away.  It takes a lot of practice to do this maneuver successfully.  Just before my student would take their check ride I’d do one just after doing an engine out emergency to a field, but at altitude.  It was always a hard maneuver to perform by the student.  If you don’t practice it, then don’t try and turn back to the field.  

   

  When I give CFI check rides it is one maneuver  I give each check ride.  There is not a correct way to do it.  I want to see if the applicant uses good judgment.  If there elect to go straight ahead then I think he is showing good judgment.  If the elect to go back and has enough altitude and lines up with the runway then they are using good judgment.  

   

  When I get my Eupora built and flying it is one maneuver that I will do during the testing phase to find out the correct bank angles and the correct speed.   These will all be done at altitude.  Hopefully, I will never have to do one for real.

   

  I'm in class right now and in the classroom the use of the airplane parachute has come up.  A number of people flying the simulator did not pull it when they iced up, ran out of gas, and the WX was zero-zero.  You will do what you have practiced. Most of us have not practiced pulling a parachute in an emergency, so in a real emergency we would not think of it.  

   

  I think all of us think about some ot the things that might happen, but how many take the time to practice what we would do in those emergencies.

    

   

  

Rick Stockton

  A210 XS tri

 [quote][b]

hansjd(at)online.no
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:22 pm Post subject: 180 degree turn back

Jon - all.



Hear -hear, wise words Jon! Your statements are all correct.



One thing though: It's a good practice to build up a little more speed on 

initial climb. After lift-off fly level to about 75 kts, then start your 

climb. Then you have gotten yourself some margins for unexpected happenings. 

OK - your initial climbs want be as spectacular as you may like, but it's a 

small price to pay!!!



Best wishes

Hans

---

ward.t(at)xtra.co.nz
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:36 pm Post subject: 180 degree turn back

Jon,



Well said. End of debate.



Tim

Tim Ward

12 Waiwetu Street,

Fendalton,

Christchurch, 8052

New Zealand



Ph +64 3 3515166

Mobile 021 0640221

ward.t(at)xtra.co.nz

---

georgepowell(at)hotmail.c
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 5:21 pm Post subject: 180 degree turn back

Just my 2 cents worth on this issue:



During my checkout in a Piper Lance, my instructor worked with me on power-off 180 approaches.  Abeam the numbers on downwind at 1,000 feet, the power came off.  The Lance glides like a brick, and it took me many attempts and a deft touch to get the airplane anywhere near the runway.  



This experience gave me a HEALTHY respect for trying a 180 with an engine failure.  If a 1,000 foot margin and perfect downwind setup made for a difficult task when I knew I could put power back in, I cannot imagine trying this under stress knowing I had to get it right the first time.



I always use Google Earth to check out an unfamiliar airport and look for nearby golf courses or fields to use in the event of a low altitude engine failure.



At my home field (KLZU), Georgia Highway 316 forms an almost extended centerline to Runway 7.  Several people have landed on the highway after engine failure on a Runway 7 takeoff and they are now members of the "316 Club."



I am sorry to hear about this accident, and hope that we can all learn from it.



George Powell

Lawrenceville, GA

Visit -  www.EuropaOwners.org

DuaneFamly(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 6:49 pm Post subject: 180 degree turn back

In a message dated 6/19/2007 6:22:12 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  georgepowell(at)hotmail.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  During    my checkout in a Piper Lance, my instructor worked with me on power-off 180    approaches.  Abeam the numbers on downwind at 1,000 feet, the power came    off.  The Lance glides like a brick, and it took me many attempts and a    deft touch to get the airplane anywhere near the  runway. 	


 

 This is an item that I always worry about.....whenever I fly the pattern, I  was taught during my tail dragger training by Amelia Reid, that the distance my  downwind leg is away from the runway is what I feel is the proper "engine out  gliding" distance. According to her, if you are in your  proper pattern, then if you should lose you engine, you can glide to the  runway. I have found too many pilots fly the same ground point references now  matter what type of plane they fly. If the Europa glides like a streamlined  brick, then I might tend to accept a further downwind leg  distance from the runway. But if I flew a real brick, then I would tend to stay  much closer to the runway. Am I missing something?

  

 So to that end, can I put a few questions to those flying tri gear and  conventional gear?

 1) Monos have no choice about flaps on takeoff....what is the norm for the  other two types?

 2) How about slips to lose any extra speed of height? Loved doing them in  Cessnas...seemed very stable....the Europa?

  

 Mike Duane  A207A

Redding, California

XS Conventional Gear

Jabiru 3300  

Sensenich R64Z N

Ground Adjustable Prop



See what's free at AOL.com. 

  [quote][b]

96victor(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 8:14 pm Post subject: 180 degree turn back

Duane, I feel strongly as you do that you should fly patterns like you could lose power at any time.  In the Army we were taught to cut the throttle downwind opposite the touch down point and only used a slight nudge of throttle on base leg to "clear" the engine. 

  

 At busy airports one too often finds long patterns with the need to carry power on final in order to reach the touch down point.  

  

 Tom Friedland



 

 On 6/19/07, DuaneFamly(at)aol.com (DuaneFamly(at)aol.com) <DuaneFamly(at)aol.com (DuaneFamly(at)aol.com)> wrote: [quote]   In a message dated 6/19/2007 6:22:12 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, georgepowell(at)hotmail.com (georgepowell(at)hotmail.com) writes:

   	  Quote: 	
		  During my checkout in a Piper Lance, my instructor worked with me on power-off 180 approaches.  Abeam the numbers on downwind at 1,000 feet, the power came off.  The Lance glides like a brick, and it took me many attempts and a deft touch to get the airplane anywhere near the runway. 	


 

 This is an item that I always worry about.....whenever I fly the pattern, I was taught during my tail dragger training by Amelia Reid, that the distance my downwind leg is away from the runway is what I feel is the proper "engine out gliding" distance. According to her, if you are in your proper pattern, then if you should lose you engine, you can glide to the runway. I have found too many pilots fly the same ground point references now matter what type of plane they fly. If the Europa glides like a streamlined brick, then I might tend to accept a further downwind leg distance from the runway. But if I flew a real brick, then I would tend to stay much closer to the runway. Am I missing something? 

  

 So to that end, can I put a few questions to those flying tri gear and conventional gear?

 1) Monos have no choice about flaps on takeoff....what is the norm for the other two types?

 2) How about slips to lose any extra speed of height? Loved doing them in Cessnas...seemed very stable....the Europa?

  

 Mike Duane A207A

Redding, California

XS Conventional Gear

Jabiru 3300 

Sensenich R64Z N

Ground Adjustable Prop



   See what's free at AOL.com.  

 	  Quote: 	
		  

	


[b]

www(at)wynne.co.uk
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 11:45 pm Post subject: 180 degree turn back

Well said Jon  -  I could not agree more.  Having survived five successful 

dead-stick landings in different Europas "NEVER EVER TURN BACK" - its that 

simple.  If the prop is set to fully fine for take-off (you do practice your 

PFLs lin that configuration don't you) your air speed and rate of descent 

will be much much faster and if there was any sort of wind down the runway 

when you took off, that runway, if by some miracle you did get all the way 

round, would be under you for a fraction of the time that it was on your 

take-off.  This is a no-brainer.  Don't even think of it.  You won't have 

time, and almost as importantly it is devastating to lose our friends this 

way.  As Dave Bosomworth says 'safe flying'  -  Bill



---

ptiller(at)lolacars.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2007 12:23 am Post subject: 180 degree turn back

Jon,



That's completely the most sensible message I've read on this discussion.  Case closed I think - I'm surprised no one mentioned it before.......



Phil

Visit -  www.EuropaOwners.org

johnwigney(at)alltel.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2007 7:26 pm Post subject: 180 degree turn back

Hi Jon,



I endorse your comments. Paraphrasing Clint Eastwood,  "Do you feel 

lucky, punk?" may be a good question to ask in the turn back situation. 

However, I believe that one should not even ask the question. One does 

not have enough time for questions. The message should be !!!"DO NOT 

TURN BACK"!!!



 I suggest that all pilots, Europa and otherwise, should practise the 

turn back at a safe altitude and I think that you will be surprised at 

the loss of altitude in a rehearsed situation. When it is unrehearsed, 

the altitude loss will always be worse for most pilots. If you make the 

wrong moves, the altitude loss will be catastrophic when a stall or spin 

bites you. A bent plane in the trees straight ahead which one can walk 

away from is always better than the violent alternative of a stall/spin 

at low altitude.



Cheers, John



N262WF, mono XS, 912S

Mooresville, North Carolina



ORIGINAL MESSAGE

Subject: 180 degree turn back

From: "JonSmith" <jonsmitheuropa(at)tiscali.co.uk>

Hi everyone!  Its not often Im moved to write here  I dont have any technical skills

to offer (I just very gratefully make use of other peoples knowledge by

reading this forum!)

However, regarding this 180 degree turning back issue Im absolutely appalled at

some of the comments Im reading here.

I cant say this loudly enough  or type it big enough:  !!!DO NOT TURN BACK!!! 

Its a killer.  It always has been and always will be.  Theres no big mystery about

it  the SAFEST option will always be to land somewhere thats reasonably in

front of you.

Thats it said really; the rest of this message is just supporting material.  Sure,

landing ahead may well result in damage to the plane.  But with a little skill

and a little luck you should come away unscathed, and maybe the plane will

too.  Depends on the local situation.  This is far far better than entering

the roulette wheel of turning back, from which the consequences of losing.well

we know that dont we?

Lets look at Mr Average (me, you, all of us) in a worse case scenario.  Climbing

out at 60 kts -  flaps still down (high drag)  nose well up cos its a nice powerful

plane with the latest prop, when the unthinkable happens  at say 500 feet

and totally unexpectedly the engine stops.  By the time weve reacted to it

the speed will have dropped to 55 kts or probably less.  Then the penny drops

and we smartly poke the stick forward and the nose thankfully starts to go down.

Speed will still be lost as the nose is going down until some sort of gliding

attitude is attained; only then will the speed loss trend be halted.  If

youre a switched on cookie and you reacted well to the surprise the speed will

now be steady at about 50 kts  but a lot less if youre not so sharp  it might

be 40 kts or less.  Remember, nose high and power off  rate of speed loss will

be tremendous.  What speed should we be aiming for in the subsequent glide?

I dont know  60 kts seems a reasonable

  safe approach and landing speed.   More if you need to manoeuvre significantly.

To increase speed in order to obtain a safe gliding speed with the engine

off,  (and especially if the flaps are down)  will need a much lower nose attitude

lower than we would EVER use in normal circumstances and will use up a very

great deal of height  probably most of your original 500 feet.  Just to get

the plane flying safely again.  Still going to turn back??  I promise you  you

will not make it!!

The first golden rule is to get the bl**dy nose well down, keep it well down and

monitor the speed carefully before any sort of manoeuvring is attempted.  In

the worse type of critical situation you can still achieve a lot with the plane

under good control.  If you lose control by not achieving and maintaining a

safe speed everything will be lost.

Incidently, this entire posting is not aimed at the Europa.  Its relevant to every

aeroplane there is.  Were fortunate with the Europa in that we are slightly

better off than many other planes because its such a great design with super

easy handling and does have some degree of glide performance which might help

reach a landing/ controlled crash site that many other planes wouldnt have the

legs to reach.  All aeroplanes glide like bricks, the Europa is just a slightly

more streamlined brick.  The Europa will stall and spin if badly handled,

say in an unwise and badly managed turn back.   Its only an aeroplane after all

and all aeroplanes will stall and spin, at least every one Ive ever flown.

Just a few comments on postings Ive read recently:  First the most serious:

Someone wrote that during their conversion training they were advised and demonstrated

(BY A PFA COACH for goodness sake!!) that a turn back is possible in the

Europa from 300 feet.  If people are being taught things like this then it

is of no surprise at all to me that these sorts of accidents are still happening

as they have been for nearly 100 years.  I dont know the person who advocates

this practise and I dont really want to, but I feel this sort of advice has

no place in modern day coaching.  The person who wrote this post went on to

say he intends to practise the manoeuvre again.  PLEASE DONT.  It sounds most

dangerous.  Firstly, heaven forbid, you might be tempted to attempt it for real,

secondly just doing it under controlled simulated conditions sounds fraught

with danger.  It would be a real shame to become a statistic trying to practise

this dangerous exercise.  JUST LAND AHEAD!

A real engine failure after take off will be totally unexpected and will place

even the most experienced pilot ever in a totally alien environment with a huge

workload.  There will be a fraction of the normal human resources available

to control the plane  thats why any action taken must be kept as simple as possible.

Incidently, pilot experience does not necessarily seem to be a factor.

In fact a newly qualified PPL maybe "safer" because hopefully he will rely on

his recent training and put the thing down straight ahead.  An "old hand" may

be more likely to "think" he is able to turn back where in reality - he can't.

Ive read discussion about how individual aircraft of the same design (ie the Europa)

have different stall/ spin characteristics from others of the same mark.

Maybe, in fact quite probably, but irrelevant to this turn back discussion.

Throughout any manoeuvring near the ground, whether during an unwise turn back

or whatever you should be nowhere near stalling!!  Thats just basic skill and

handling.  If the difference between one variant or another determines the possible

successful outcome or otherwise of a situation  DONT GO THERE!!  Fly the

aircraft properly; well balanced and at a safe speed and you will stay safe.

People talk about slipping or skidding turns near the stall.  DO NOT DO THIS

NEAR THE GROUND.  If you cannot manoeuvre near the ground without slipping or

skidding and/or stalling then dont do it  youve guessed it . Land ahead!!

Ive read about Europa fuel tanks and their survivability.  I dont know any of the

technical bits but it seems to me to be an excellent, strong and well - positioned

design. Ive flown a Piper Pawnee with the fuel tank sandwiched between

the engine and the pilot, just ready for the engine to be pushed back into the

tank.  The Super Cub has the left wing tank header tank just above your toes.

Ive flown the Falke motorglider with the tank just behind your head!  Its got

to go somewhere and the Europa seems to be at least as good as any of those!

If an aircraft is to sadly stall/ spin into the ground then I dont think any

type of fuel tank will survive this.  Dont worry about the tank  concentrate

on flying safely instead and youll be fine!

The Europa is a fine aircraft but it will bite back if mis-handled just like any

other aircraft will.  We must all strive to be safe and sensible and try not

to let a plane bite us.

Best wishes, sorry to ramble on  got carried away!

Jon Smith

G-TERN

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Europa-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum